Abstract: A field experiment was conducted in Southern Italy to evaluate the effects of different water quality and fertilizers on yield performance of tomato crop. In mineral nitrogen (N) fertilizer and irrigation with fresh water (Electrical Conductivity, EC, = 0.9 dS m⁻¹) (FWF); mineral N fertilizer and irrigation with saline water (EC = 6.0 dS m⁻¹) (SWF); municipal solid waste (MSW) compost and irrigation with fresh water (EC = 0.9 dS m⁻¹) (FWC); MSW compost and irrigation with saline water (EC = 6.0 dS m⁻¹) (SWC). At harvest, weight and number of fruits and refractometric index (°Brix) were measured, total and marketable yield and dry matter of fruit were calculated. The results indicated that MSW compost, applied as amendment, could substitute the mineral fertilizer. In fact, in the treatments based on compost application, the tomato average marketable yield increased by 9% compared with treatments with mineral fertilizer. The marketable yield in the SWF and SWC treatments (with an average soil EC in two years to about 3.5 dS m⁻¹) decreased respectively of 20 and 10%, in respect to fresh water treatments. At the end of the experiment, application of compost significantly decreased the sodium absorption rate (SAR) of SWC treatment in respect of SWF (−29.9%). Significant differences were observed among the four treatments both on soil solution cations either exchangeable cations. In particular compost application increased the calcium (Ca) and potassium (K) contents in saturated soil paste respect to the SWF ones (31.4% and 59.5%, respectively). At the same time saturated soil paste sodium (Na) in SWC treatment recorded a decrease of 17.4% compared to SWF.

Abstract: The use of biophysical models in agroecology has increased in the last few decades for two main reasons: the need to formalize empirical knowledge and the need to disseminate model-based decision support for decision makers (such as farmers, advisors, and policy makers). The first has encouraged the development and use of mathematical models to enhance the efficiency of field research through extrapolation beyond the limits of site, season, and management. The second reflects the increasing need (by scientists, managers, and the public) for simulation experimentation to explore options and consequences, for example, future resource use efficiency (i.e., management in sustainable intensification), impacts of and adaptation to climate change, understanding market and policy responses to shocks initiated at a biophysical level under increasing demand, and limited supply capacity. Production concerns thus dominate most model applications, but there is a notable growing emphasis on environmental, economic, and policy dimensions. Identifying effective methods of assessing model quality and performance has become a challenging but vital imperative, considering the variety of factors influencing model outputs. Understanding the requirements of stakeholders, in respect of model use, logically implies the need for their inclusion in model evaluation methods. We reviewed the use of metrics of model evaluation, with a particular emphasis on the involvement of stakeholders to expand horizons beyond conventional structured, numeric analyses. Two major topics are discussed: (1) the importance of deliberative processes for model evaluation, and (2) the role computer-aided techniques may play to integrate deliberative processes into the evaluation of agroecological models. We point out that (i) the evaluation of agroecological models can be improved through stakeholder follow-up, which is a key for the acceptability of model realizations in practice, (ii) model credibility depends not only on the outcomes of well-structured, numerically based evaluation, but also on less tangible factors that may need to be addressed using complementary deliberative processes, (iii) comprehensive evaluation of simulation models can be achieved by integrating the expectations of stakeholders via a weighting system of preferences and perception, (iv) questionnaire-based surveys can help understand the challenges posed by the deliberative process, and (v) a benefit can be obtained if model evaluation is conceived in a decisional perspective and evaluation techniques are developed at the same pace with which the models themselves are created and improved. Scientific knowledge hubs are also recognized as critical pillars to advance good modeling practice in relation to model evaluation (including access to dedicated software tools), an activity which is frequently neglected in the context of time-limited framework programs.

Abstract: Climate change impact assessments on agriculture are subject to large uncertainties, as demonstrated in the present review of recent studies for Africa. There are multiple reasons for differences in projections, including uncertainties in greenhouse gas emissions and patterns of climate change; assumptions on future management, aggregation, and spatial extent; and methodological differences. Still, all projections agree that climate change poses a significant risk to African agriculture. Most projections also see the possibility of increasing agricultural production under climate change, especially if suitable adaptation measures are assumed. Climate change is not the only projected pressure on African agriculture, which struggles to meet demand today and may need to feed an additional one billion individuals by 2050. Development strategies are urgently needed, but they will need to consider future climate change and its inherent uncertainties. Science needs to show how existing synergies between climate change adaptation and development can be exploited.